The Last Gospel and the filioque

[jimmy]

I was Just reading the last gospel and one line caught my eye. I highlighted it below.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was made nothing that was made**. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.** There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men might believe through him. He was not that Light, but was to give testimony of the Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He came unto His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, He gave power to become the sons of God: to them that believe in His name: who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (genuflect here) AND THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

I saw this line and I thought immediately of the filioque. I thought this looked like a proof for the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son also.

Does anyone else see it like this?

 

[beng]

No.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

No too.

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Jimmy, explain how you see it.

 

[jimmy]

Fr Ambrose:

Jimmy, explain how you see it.

I wasn’t making a declaration that it is definatly what it is. I was just wondering whether I was thinking right.

I was thinking of the line that in him was life and the life was the light of men. I was contrasting that to the fact that the Holy Spirit was the one who spoke through the profits. So the Holy Spirit was the light of men. I also saw this as being from the beginning as it says above that line, “In the beginning was the word…In him was life…”

I may be wrong, I am just Jimmy.

 

[a_pilgrim]

Hi, Jimmy!

Although I do not interpret this particular scriptural reference in the same light as you do, I do admire your desire to read the scripture as more than just a series of words, and to try to discern the deeper meanings that the Holy Spirit inspired within the writers.

With regard to the specific issue of the filioque, here’s my current take on it:

The West will continue to take the filioque; the East will continue to omit the filioque. Period.

…not that that’s necessarily a bad thing.

For centuries (literally!), both sides have tried to justify their positions with regard to this intensely devisive issue. Today, we seem to have arrived at a sort of “agree to disagree” state with regard to the issue. The Holy Father himself has been known to take the filioque when celebrating Mass in the Western tradition and omit it when celebrating the Divine Liturgy in the Eastern tradition.

With all the other impediments currently standing in the way of true East-West unity, I believe we’d be wise to accept today’s status quo regarding the filioque and turn our attention to issues that actually can be remedied. After all the centuries of dissertation, dissention, confrontation and, sadly, no small amount of bloodshed, I believe we’d be wise to embrace the current state of detente with regard to the filioque as a true gift from God, and proceed on to other areas with our reunification efforts. In my opinion, it does no good to continue to revisit this painful issue, especially since centuries of human nature have taught us that a common, unequivicable “correct answer” is not likely to be forthcoming. Better to accept the Procession of the Holy Spirit as one of those Mysteries we’re not intended to know fully in this lifetime (I know, I know… spoken like a true Easterner, huh? ).

Jimmy, I don’t believe the “proof” you’re looking for is going to be revealed to us anytime soon (although many on both sides of the issue will, and undoubtedly do, claim to possess such proof in their arguments). It’s time to look at the Big Picture instead. If we can live with our current interpretations (BOTH of which, BTW, are for the most part accepted as being theologically sound by all parties involved) - and I believe we’ve proven that we CAN live with them - then I think it’s time to direct our reunification energies elsewhere.

a pilgrim